Creating spaces for dialogue: a cluster-randomized evaluation of CARE’s Community Score Card on health governance outcomes

Table 5 Home visit from health workers as predicted by governance-related measures (subpopulation analysis^b)

Independent variable	Odds Ratio	Confidence Interval	Χ²	p
Trust in health workers	1.79	1.10–2.92	5.45	.020
Power sharing	1.14	0.82–1.58	0.61	.434
Mutual responsibility	1.20	0.58–2.48	0.24	.623
Negotiated spaces participation	1.64	1.31–2.06	18.77	<.001
Joint monitoring and transparency	1.93	1.04–3.56	4.37	.037
Equity and quality	2.94	0.85–10.17	2.88	.089
Collective efficacy	1.84	1.12–3.01	5.89	.015
Outcomes of collective action (direct)	5.44	1.94–15.20	10.42	.001
Perceived health outcomes of collective action	1.21	0.73–2.00	0.54	.463
Is the HAC an effective bridge between the health facility and community?	3.26	1.13–9.41	4.77	.029
Is there a Community Action Group or Safe Motherhood Committee?	2.81	1.12–7.04	4.83	.028
Does the Community Action Group or Safe Motherhood Committee provide maternal and newborn health support?	1.49	0.42–5.28	0.37	.541
Community help	3.71	2.07–6.67	19.34	<.001

^aEstimates were obtained from separate models for each outcome. All models contained the following covariates: religion, ethnicity, current marital status, literacy, number of lifetime live births, wealth index, and nearest health facility providing delivery services
^bAmong those women in the intervention areas who reported a meeting in their community

ISSN: 1472-6963